effects of increased taxation on so-called financial income of individuals.
Financial Investment income, capital gains, dividends and interest, are "income" and not "income". The term "rent" in economics has a completely different meaning, defines the gain derived from ownership of land. The misuse of the term seems to suggest that the financial income earners, savers, are the parasites that live, in fact, "annuity" without producing anything (*). The reality is quite different. Who today do not spend time, effort, energy and money in finding the best personal financial investment, and invests in the case, certainly not gaining anything, is even receding. Those who entrust the management of others is not rich, but it does enrich the operator. If today you want to have real income from financial investments, the trader must become a semi-professional level, or at least try, and it is this that made tens of thousands of savers. The work of financial investment is a hard job, no schedules or vacations, very high risk (especially in Italy, where they are deficient or non-existent delle reali protezioni per i risparmiatori), lavoro che richiede una preparazione e un impegno enormi, continui, impensabili.
In materia di risparmio e tassazione del risparmio vi è una diffusa mancanza di conoscenza. In troppi esprimono pareri sulla base di irreali concezioni demagogiche ed ideologiche, senza il fondamento di una precisa conoscenza tecnica della questione. Gli errori più grossolani che solitamente si fanno sono sostanzialmente due. Il primo consiste nel considerare il reddito finanziario nominale, e non quello reale, cioè depurato dall'inflazione che colpisce il patrimonio investito. Il secondo errore viene commesso quando si vuol mettere sullo stesso piano le aliquote nominali di imposte profondamente diverse fra loro quali are, in detail, the personal income tax, corporate income tax levied on businesses, and instead substitute tax that is applied to investment income: the different backgrounds of the tax base of each of these taxes makes that a hypothetical same nominal rate, say 20%, much more weight in the case of substitute tax, much less for the income tax of individuals, and even less for the tax on business. The equate the nominal rates of the three very different taxes, as well as not take account of inflation affecting the savings can also be done in good faith, but nevertheless constitute gross manifestations of incompetence.
briefly examine what are the most common types of income from financial investments:
dividends: the share of profits distributed to shareholders of a company. The investor who invests by buying shares in a company becomes a pro-rata co-owner of that company;
capital gains or capital gains: the difference between the purchase price and the sale of a financial instrument, shares, bonds, futures, etc. .. The investor with a difficult job of trading, seeking to capitalize on the price difference, however, very serious risk of losing;
interest: payment of the loan. The savings, investments in (ie buying) debt (bonds) issued by states or (BTP, BOT, Bund.) or by private companies (corporate), pay their money, threatening to not have them back (bond Cirio, Argentinian bonds), and in return receive interest. Do not make more than almost anything, however, deposits and current accounts, in fact they often generate net costs to the account holder.
In all three types of investment income now seen, there is an income - real income only if the increase in year-end cash money saver is higher than the loss in value, purchasing power of money itself, that is, if actual inflation is higher, otherwise there is a real loss (or income negative real). In recent years, the monetary gains were and still are on average lower than actual inflation, so investors are losing wealth, and this has generated a rush to purchase real estate, resulting in a housing bubble. In summary, the real income, supposedly to be taxed, would be what remains after subtracting inflation to nominal yield: But today the tax affects all income, including that part aside from the loss of purchasing power of savings invested. Nevertheless, on the occasion of the last financial year, have been pressing proposals for more advanced parts of a further increase in taxation of savings.
Several economists, such as Luigi Einaudi, historically have expressed serious doubts about the advisability and utility of the taxation of financial investment, taxation considered counterproductive for the development of the country, in particular since:
1. the savings is money, money, and as such is subject to inflation, that is, loss of purchasing power, or a loss of value. This loss of value should be in favor of the state, was a defendant because he is, directly or through entities controlled by him, that issues that currency. So inflation is a tax, in fact, is the heaviest and most insidious tax of which it already benefits from the state. All that we experience every day in Italy inflation is much higher than officially stated by ISTAT: This is the real inflation tax that savers are already paying the tax, plus the current tax 12.5% \u200b\u200bwho now wants to increase;
2. owners of large estates securities will not be scratched by the slightest increase in taxes on investment income, or because they already have the tax residence abroad, or have implemented trick of international taxation, such as offshore trusts, for which already Italy today do not pay a cent of taxes on such large capital securities, nor Italy can and will do nothing against them, so the increase in taxation sui redditi finanziari di fatto andrebbe a colpire solo i piccoli e medi risparmiatori;
3. i risparmiatori sono stati i soggetti più svantaggiati nella redistribuzione del reddito degli ultimi anni, tra rendimenti reali negativi, crollo della new economy, crack di società quotate (Parmalat, Cirio, Ferruzzi.); nel contempo i prezzi degli immobili, ritenuti l'unico vero bene rifugio tutelante dall'inflazione, sono saliti alle stelle gonfiati per di più dai tassi di interesse ai minimi del secolo;
4. decine di migliaia di risparmiatori nei decenni scorsi hanno ripopolato Svizzera, Montecarlo e Austria, fuggendo dall'Italia, portando via i loro soldi anche quando il farlo costituiva reato, pur di difenderli by the tightening of the tax bite - inflation scare away even the last remaining certainly does not help Italy to get back on top of economic development. If the tax rate will be high on Italy has lost its funding for these investors last weak attraction that was left. Tax havens around the world (or even too far) that await them with open arms, and already full of Italians, those who want to find them. And the '60s and '70s have amply demonstrated that the capital flight can not be stopped;
5. loss of earnings from savings wiped out from the grip low yields - increased taxation, depression has devastating effects on the economy and consumption, grafting a spiral of stagnation that can last decades, as has happened in Japan;
6. escape from the financial investment would push people to invest more in property, and cause a magnified the housing bubble, with house prices already unsustainable
7. level of Public Finance, the benefit to the exchequer from the rise in taxes on investment income is paltry and uncertain than ever, with more disadvantages than advantages, while you have a very clear political and demagogic believed value, plus much obsolete in relation to the current composition of the assets of the majority of Italians;
8. who have savings to invest in financial instruments, such savings because he has put aside a portion of his income: income already taxed from the income tax during the periods in which they were received, then the savings are already taxed income;
9 . dividends, as corporate profits are already taxed by the company, which distributes them to the net corporate tax savers-shareholders, who then again, they pay the substitute tax on them, then the dividends are already taxed twice;
10. capital gains and interest earnings are for those receiving them, but losses for those who pay them: the final balance for the whole economy is zero, no There is equally amenable to value-added tax, or reasons why the fair tax you get between the loser and who gains;
11. certain industry can not blame the poor performance of their businesses on the tax burden which undergo, in fact very low: the rate on business income is fictitious, since it is not applicable on all income, but only on the taxable income and any accountant can decimate the taxable business income. A series of free groups, deductions and allowances are provided for all other types of income, starting with employment income. The rate on investment income, however, no discounts apply on all income, fino all'ultimo centesimo, non essendovi alcuna possibilità di dedurre costi e spese dall'imponibile. Si applicano anche sulle perdite da inflazione. Quindi il paragonare l'aliquota solo nominalmente più alta del reddito d'impresa o di lavoro a quella del 12,5% sui redditi finanziari non ha senso. Il vero problema, insormontabile, è che il costo del lavoro italiano è dieci volte quello cinese o indiano;
12. per i risparmiatori le perdite finanziarie (minusvalenze) sono deducibili dal reddito imponibile solo per quattro anni, quando i cicli economici e di borsa durano ben più di quattro anni. Esemplificando molto, se nell'arco di dieci anni il risparmiatore ha guadagnato 10 e perso 20, con un risultato finale netto negativo (Loss) of -10, it has a good chance of paying taxes as if he had won +5: it may seem absurd, but it's true, this is the law in force;
13. the same professional traders pointed out as "speculators" are tens of thousands of honest workers who produce wealth, to contribute to inject money into the stock exchange, are not asking for subsidies or protection money to anyone paying the inflation tax and the tax until the replacement 'last penny, and even if they operate on foreign stock exchanges lead and spend their profits in Italy: do not understand why this sector that generates wealth and jobs should be penalized by punitive tax measures, the increase in the rate from 12.5% 20% would decrease the returns of investors of 7.5% on an annual income, for example, € 20,000, the investor would be extorted, in addition to that already pays € 2500, another 1500 € (all without counting inflation), and think that for the taxation of income of employees arguing for 100 or 200 € more or less ...;
14. is simply meaningless the claim that the increase from 12.5% \u200b\u200bto 20% of the rate on Treasury bills and stock market gains would be offset by a decrease from 27 to 20% of tax on current accounts (which is, the so-called " harmonization of tax rates "): current accounts do not make nearly anything, in fact, often give much lower yields infinitesimal their cost, only serve to park money, what the rate would be lowered from 27 to 20% on anything? Income for investors comes from the BOT and the stock market gains: 'harmonization' of the rates mask, evil, an increase in taxation of savings;
15. another pretext to support the increase of taxation of savings, the claim required "harmonization" of our taxation to that of other European countries, is also unfounded: the taxation of financial income (profits as a business) in the 25 European countries' very different, and there are countries where financial returns are fully exempt from taxation; on the taxation of financial income in each country goes on his own. Be stressed however that in countries where there is already unfair tax measures, the banks and the SIM is not irrelevant that work exclusively on investments held for each nation, do not extend to the fingers of one hand: in Italy, providing a wealth of professionalism and Working all Italian, I'm over 20, including the best and the biggest in Europe, and among the most effective and the world in case of increase in taxation on saving at least the first half will be forced to encumber the fees and then to close its doors, laying off employees. The real international trend, from the USA, is a substantial reduction in taxation on income in order to attract financial capital needed for development. Unfortunately in Italy do not like certain industrial projects funded through the normal channels and the Stock Exchanges, and thus having to answer for their actions in front of investors and the market. Consequently he has no sense to speak of harmonization. And then you pay taxes for services: public policy, justice, health care means services offered by the state to the Italians are not even comparable to those of the best European countries.
Italy did not suffer any decline if the Italians prefer to be investors, shareholders or creditors of companies located abroad, instead of Fiat workers. Italians go to the profits, wealth, and goes abroad the work more arduous.
reality, the truth is that Italy are not polluting industries, imported labor and useless bureaucrats, but Italy has almost unique in the world, the requirements of history, art, climate, food, environment and becomes the permanent residence and / or the tourist destination of the rich world, and this may lead us far more wealth than any other type of economic development. We could become the European Union Florida, we live in a paradise for well-off, instead, harassed, in a hell of immigrants, crime, drug dealing, prostitution, pollution and noise.
would be much smarter to defend the heritage environmental and cultural quality of life, and attract the wealthy, de-taxation all income typical of the wealthy, among them financial services. The elimination of the substitute tax on capital gains, dividends and interest, stimulate investment in the stock market and restore some vitality to the mechanism of economic circularity 'of wealth that should be well known by Quesnau onwards. This circular mechanism of wealth created by the investment of savings, and to which financial speculation as a stimulus and energy, should be the essential reference for anyone who wants to sensibly use the word "development".
final note that our Constitution in Articles 42 and 47 protection, together with the private ownership of property, savings in all its forms.
For the growth of wealth of each Italian and Italy do not need all that "someone else" pay more taxes. The master plan is to reduce waste and costs, less state and more market, not more taxes to this or that.
(*) Note: I invite the reader to type in on Google or any other search engine the subject tax financial income to verify a person with as much bad faith, dishonesty and misconduct the matter be dealt with by some, yet a Good time, there was a commandment to not covet stuff (and savings) of others.
Mr. Di San Filippo Matteucci Ginesio
privatization Economist for Global Free Trade
"The state does not solve the problems. The state is the problem." Ronald Reagan
0 comments:
Post a Comment